Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Vault
Time Travel Schematics
T.E.C. Time Archive
The Why Files
Have You Seen...?
Chronovisor
TimeTravelForum.tk
TimeTravelForum.net
ParanormalNetwork.net
Paranormalis.com
ConspiracyCafe.net
Streams
Live streams
Featured streams
Multi-Viewer
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Time Travel Forum
John Titor's Legacy
Who Perpetrated the John Titor Hoax?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Sean" data-source="post: 52957" data-attributes="member: 3106"><p><span style="font-family: 'georgia'"><span style="color: white">1. Welcome to Paranormalis. You are awakening a 6 month old thread that you perhaps didn't read thoroughly.</span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'georgia'"><span style="color: white">2. I said that in the first post on this thread.</span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'georgia'"><span style="color: white">3. I'm really not sure what you mean here. Could you please expand on it?</span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'georgia'"><span style="color: white">4. Actually there are several writers collaborating on the TV shows you watch every day. They put all their ideas together and then write the show based on what they feel will work out the best for the audience. There is no way for anyone to know if there was more than 1 person in the room while JT was posting or chatting.</span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'georgia'"><span style="color: white">5. As a final note, this thread was started as a tongue-in-cheek rebuttal and meant to be humorous. Guess this shows why I'm not a Hollywood writer.</span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'georgia'"><span style="color: white">1. There is no point in attacking my comprehension skills as I have read your original thread without holes. I would never have posted anything if I weren't careful in replying to the specific parts of your comments that I find uncanny.</span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'georgia'"><span style="color: white">2. I am very well aware that you told us to ignore the fact that it may well be Titer. I shall now narrate the two possible scenarios and repel then one by one. First scenario, in which John Titor spelled his own name wrong. In common sense this would not be plausible, but to make sure that I have completely deleted this scenario, John Titor is a person that understands complex physics concepts and can spell physics vocabulary with the utmost accuracy; adding to the fact that John Titor posted this name several times in several different forums, there is no chance that he will spell his name wrong every single time. Second scenario, in which John Titor purposely changed the acronymic spelling of Titer into Titor. This scenario is as implausible as the first due to the fact that I know several people with Titer included in their name, so there is no meaning in changing Titer into Titor. To weight this argument further, Pointing out microscopic details from specific arguments is the strategy that is commonly used in creating conspiracy theories. Therefore, in pointing out the "clever acronym" that John Titor supposedly "created" you successfully created a conspiracy theory against John Titor. As you are trying to disprove the theory of John Titor, you entrapped yourself into this mess of strings and strengthened the argument for John Titor.</span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'georgia'"><span style="color: white">3. I apologies for my rashness. The first quote that you have highlighted is a re-quote of your original statement. Since I do not have sufficient experience in this forum, I am not familiar with the concept of quoting. The second quote that you have highlighted was my satirical expression of my mental perspective of your effort to disprove John Titor; in order to complete this; you added opinionated phrases that are both unnecessary and offensive in a way differentiated from opinions to actualization of that of those who approve of John Titor.</span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'georgia'"><span style="color: white">4. Television shows are divided into several categories that I will not list completely in the following statement. First there are realities shows, in which drama of real life are reenacted in a controlled environment. Secondly, there are replays of classical movies. Thirdly, there are sports announcements and replays of games that preceded closely to that of its airtime. Fourthly, there are talk shows, in which one main talk’s person with a wireless device connected to those that of the "backstage" interviews, a specific subject. In this argument, I shall assume that you are relating to the latter of the four. First of all, I will say this in precedent to my argument: we have no evidence whatsoever that John Titor was the only time traveler that was supposedly "sent" back in time to 1975 to retrieve the IBM 5100 and happen to arrive in the year of 2000. Although TV talk shows are created by a production group, the exact show is presented from one person's mind, and therefore it is presented utmost with the voice style of one person, and the ideological style of multiple people behind the scenes. We can assume a scenario that is present in most of all TV talk shows. The person who is talking in the front does not actually understand any of the information presented, but rather, he is connected to a person in the backstage who hears all of the information that is received by the talking person and gives the talking person ideas of what to respond. With that said, it is possible that John Titor was followed closely by a group of followers but in fear of changing his proposed "divergence in the world lines", he alone was chosen to talk for the group. Therefore this argument is turned obsolete because the scenario of multiple subjects is and will not be disproven. </span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'georgia'"><span style="color: white">5(a). Disregarding the long block of text that I have drafted above, I strongly believe that in the future, there is no reason whatsoever for anyone to waste their time in disproving a subject that can neither be proven nor disproven due to the presence of meager evidence supporting either views. In fact, this evidence is so lacking that critics of both sides are gathering "evidence" from miniscule details, working up to even commenting on the creation of John Titor's name. </span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'georgia'"><span style="color: white">5(b). I may be a bit shallow in the specific subject area of the type of humor that you are referring to. Personally, from an amateur's perspective, I do not understand the humor that you have incorporated into this thread. Perhaps that is why I am taking this subject a bit too seriously. But if you are indeed writing this entire thread as a joke per say, then I believe the effort to prove John Titor a hoax has been dropped. Indeed I find the entire effort to prove John Titor a fake a bit unsettling seeing that this cause is desperate enough to take away the rights of an honorary black citizen residing in the United States and giving him crimes which he has not done. This entire cause has now been dropped because it has begun to violate the basic constitutional rights that every American is endowed with. In conclusion to my statement, I accept your implicit apology. This debate is now settled.</span></span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Sean, post: 52957, member: 3106"] [FONT=georgia][COLOR=white]1. Welcome to Paranormalis. You are awakening a 6 month old thread that you perhaps didn't read thoroughly.[/COLOR][/FONT] [FONT=georgia][COLOR=white]2. I said that in the first post on this thread.[/COLOR][/FONT] [FONT=georgia][COLOR=white]3. I'm really not sure what you mean here. Could you please expand on it?[/COLOR][/FONT] [FONT=georgia][COLOR=white]4. Actually there are several writers collaborating on the TV shows you watch every day. They put all their ideas together and then write the show based on what they feel will work out the best for the audience. There is no way for anyone to know if there was more than 1 person in the room while JT was posting or chatting.[/COLOR][/FONT] [FONT=georgia][COLOR=white]5. As a final note, this thread was started as a tongue-in-cheek rebuttal and meant to be humorous. Guess this shows why I'm not a Hollywood writer.[/COLOR][/FONT] [FONT=georgia][COLOR=white]1. There is no point in attacking my comprehension skills as I have read your original thread without holes. I would never have posted anything if I weren't careful in replying to the specific parts of your comments that I find uncanny.[/COLOR][/FONT] [FONT=georgia][COLOR=white]2. I am very well aware that you told us to ignore the fact that it may well be Titer. I shall now narrate the two possible scenarios and repel then one by one. First scenario, in which John Titor spelled his own name wrong. In common sense this would not be plausible, but to make sure that I have completely deleted this scenario, John Titor is a person that understands complex physics concepts and can spell physics vocabulary with the utmost accuracy; adding to the fact that John Titor posted this name several times in several different forums, there is no chance that he will spell his name wrong every single time. Second scenario, in which John Titor purposely changed the acronymic spelling of Titer into Titor. This scenario is as implausible as the first due to the fact that I know several people with Titer included in their name, so there is no meaning in changing Titer into Titor. To weight this argument further, Pointing out microscopic details from specific arguments is the strategy that is commonly used in creating conspiracy theories. Therefore, in pointing out the "clever acronym" that John Titor supposedly "created" you successfully created a conspiracy theory against John Titor. As you are trying to disprove the theory of John Titor, you entrapped yourself into this mess of strings and strengthened the argument for John Titor.[/COLOR][/FONT] [FONT=georgia][COLOR=white]3. I apologies for my rashness. The first quote that you have highlighted is a re-quote of your original statement. Since I do not have sufficient experience in this forum, I am not familiar with the concept of quoting. The second quote that you have highlighted was my satirical expression of my mental perspective of your effort to disprove John Titor; in order to complete this; you added opinionated phrases that are both unnecessary and offensive in a way differentiated from opinions to actualization of that of those who approve of John Titor.[/COLOR][/FONT] [FONT=georgia][COLOR=white]4. Television shows are divided into several categories that I will not list completely in the following statement. First there are realities shows, in which drama of real life are reenacted in a controlled environment. Secondly, there are replays of classical movies. Thirdly, there are sports announcements and replays of games that preceded closely to that of its airtime. Fourthly, there are talk shows, in which one main talk’s person with a wireless device connected to those that of the "backstage" interviews, a specific subject. In this argument, I shall assume that you are relating to the latter of the four. First of all, I will say this in precedent to my argument: we have no evidence whatsoever that John Titor was the only time traveler that was supposedly "sent" back in time to 1975 to retrieve the IBM 5100 and happen to arrive in the year of 2000. Although TV talk shows are created by a production group, the exact show is presented from one person's mind, and therefore it is presented utmost with the voice style of one person, and the ideological style of multiple people behind the scenes. We can assume a scenario that is present in most of all TV talk shows. The person who is talking in the front does not actually understand any of the information presented, but rather, he is connected to a person in the backstage who hears all of the information that is received by the talking person and gives the talking person ideas of what to respond. With that said, it is possible that John Titor was followed closely by a group of followers but in fear of changing his proposed "divergence in the world lines", he alone was chosen to talk for the group. Therefore this argument is turned obsolete because the scenario of multiple subjects is and will not be disproven. [/COLOR][/FONT] [FONT=georgia][COLOR=white]5(a). Disregarding the long block of text that I have drafted above, I strongly believe that in the future, there is no reason whatsoever for anyone to waste their time in disproving a subject that can neither be proven nor disproven due to the presence of meager evidence supporting either views. In fact, this evidence is so lacking that critics of both sides are gathering "evidence" from miniscule details, working up to even commenting on the creation of John Titor's name. [/COLOR][/FONT] [FONT=georgia][COLOR=white]5(b). I may be a bit shallow in the specific subject area of the type of humor that you are referring to. Personally, from an amateur's perspective, I do not understand the humor that you have incorporated into this thread. Perhaps that is why I am taking this subject a bit too seriously. But if you are indeed writing this entire thread as a joke per say, then I believe the effort to prove John Titor a hoax has been dropped. Indeed I find the entire effort to prove John Titor a fake a bit unsettling seeing that this cause is desperate enough to take away the rights of an honorary black citizen residing in the United States and giving him crimes which he has not done. This entire cause has now been dropped because it has begun to violate the basic constitutional rights that every American is endowed with. In conclusion to my statement, I accept your implicit apology. This debate is now settled.[/COLOR][/FONT] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Time Travel Forum
John Titor's Legacy
Who Perpetrated the John Titor Hoax?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top